Article I grants the Congress the regulatory oversight of Immigration. Article II stands the President of the United States as the chief
magistrate to enforce the Laws of the United States. Article III established
that "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one
supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to
time ordain and establish."

NOwhere in Article III is the Federal Judiciary given
the authority to legislate from the Bench, nor rewrite the laws of the United
States to fit a judge’s personal whim and fancy. Such judicial action is not
only judicially moved in Violation to Title 28 USCA § 453, it is sedition
cloaked under the color of law.

In the first instance case coming out of Seattle
addressing the Executive Order Banning entry from seven specified nations by
aliens, Federal District Court Judge James Robart violated Title 28 § 453 in
order to move a colorful judicial order that violated Title 8 USCA § 1182(f).

Not to be outdone , William Canby, Richard Clifton and
Michelle Friedland who sat as the “Motions Panel” on the 9th Circuit Court of
Appeals, collectively continued this Deep State usurpation to the Rule of Law
by supporting the rhetorical arrogance lofted about by Robart under the color
of law.

When the Courts move seditious muse from the Bench under
the Color of Article III, they are legislating from the bench in this instance
an improper movement by James Robart in Seattle, which was the judicial
sedition emulated by Derrick Watson of Honolulu, followed closely by Theodore
Chuang in Greenbelt.

Hart–Celler Act of 1965 does not support the specious
argument moved by the State’s Attorney General in Seattle, or in Honolulu nor
do the laws of the United States support Theodore D. Chuang 43 page political
dissertation.

In all instances from Seattle, Honolulu and finally
Greenbelt, the Plaintiffs had no justiciable standing in law which left these
three appointed public officials confirmed by the Senate, one order, which was
to have dismissed these fictitious claims for failure to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted.

The Judicial Assault upon the Article II prerogative regarding immigration as
authorized by the Article I legislation enacted as The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, as subsequently amended substantiates the “Deep State”
is a collective of State and Federal public actors sitting in a seditious
conspiracy to obstruct the constitutionally constituted rule of law.

The Court does not make "law', nor may "case
law" be invoked as "law" to override the rule of law.

Unfortunately the Federal Judiciary has brazenly
legislated from the bench without concern to being held accountable for such
seditious acts under a Bill of Impeachment.

Since 1803 Fifteen
Federal Judges have been impeached, where four were convicted, three resigned,
and eight were acquitted by the Senate. Not one was Impeached for
sedition, which is what legislating from the bench truly shall be.

When Thomas Jefferson was confronted with a Judicial
arena populated by known partisan enemies, he engaged Congress to enact the
Judiciary Act of 1802 (2 Stat. 156) which directly abolished sixteen
judgeships.

It is time to reorganize this corrupted judicial branch
by holding these life time appointees accountable for their legalistic wrongs,
by Bills of Impeachment and Judicial Reorganization as authorized in Article
III clause 1: "and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time
to time ordain and establish."